Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Saviolo

(3,282 posts)
Sun Oct 13, 2013, 07:51 PM Oct 2013

Something finally occurred to me.

I see so many people who just feel stultified by the inability to act. People living hand to mouth who feel paralyzed by inability to get anything done. It's not just having not much money... there's lots of people who've been very successful coming from little or nothing. But it seems to be rarer and rarer these days, why is that? What's going on now that's different?

People still have good ideas. There's always the fear that there are no new good ideas, that everything's been done. That's not true, there are lots of great ideas that people can still accomplish. So, what is it, now? Those of us living paycheque to paycheque, getting by with increasing debt, credit card interest rates, etc... are just decried as lazy do-nothings. Takers.

With all the recent talk about the Swiss idea of giving all adults a guaranteed minimum income monthly, regardless of their employment status, it finally struck me. It's something that's happened to me, much to my dismay. I've been forced for so long to say, "Well... I just don't have the money to implement that project or this idea, I guess I'll have to put it off." And then the next idea gets put off. And the next. Until you find yourself just stultified and unable to even form ideas any longer. I used to have some great ideas for things to do. Projects for the future. But I live paycheque to paycheque. I work in a retail travel job, and don't make a whole lot of money. I pay down my credit cards when I can, I'm not super-deep in debt. But I don't have the funds to start new projects, and when I come home from working long retail hours being talked down to by many customers, I don't have any motivation left for new ideas. I read. I watch TV. I'm anesthetizing myself. So are so many of us.

Why is it? Because community is only for rich people now. No, I'm serious. The wealthy have networks that get their family members into jobs, into schools, into anywhere they need to be. And the "libertarians" and Ayn Rand worshipers have been trying to convince us for years that it's all about your own individual impetus to become a success. That we don't need the help of others, and we should not help others. But that's not how the wealthy work. Again, I'm using broad strokes here, and there are of course self-made men and women who struggled up with no wealthy benefactors, etc... but as time goes on, it's harder and harder to do that. Why? Because we're bring told that doing it on our own is the only way to do it. Getting help from community or from government is just this side of COMMUNISM! And that's the worst possible thing! How well do your know your neighbours? How well connected are you through your place of work, or your local community centre? Volunteer work?

The wealthy don't have any of these worries. They have the funds and the network and the community to accomplish all of these things without deciding, "Do I start this project, or skip meals for a couple of days?" or, "Do I gas up my car or feed my kids this week?" Income disparity may be the biggest issue currently facing us, and we're told over and over that it's no big deal. Why doesn't anyone seem to have any money? Because it's all in the holdings of the mega rich. It's not in the economy. It's only making more wealth for those that hold it.

So, this has been long and rambling. It probably doesn't make much sense, but I had to get it out and off of my chest.

Some information about income inequality (some we've seen before, I know):


32 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Something finally occurred to me. (Original Post) Saviolo Oct 2013 OP
Not long and rambling at all. An EXCELLENT post. Th1onein Oct 2013 #1
May I ask a nosy question? Autumn Colors Oct 2013 #2
Canada in fact Saviolo Oct 2013 #4
Harper Autumn Colors Oct 2013 #13
Next time around Saviolo Oct 2013 #15
But NEVER happens in Alberta. LOL, go figure. laundry_queen Oct 2013 #18
Oh, so agreed Saviolo Oct 2013 #20
Thanks for a very intersting post. (nt) enough Oct 2013 #3
"Because community is only for rich people now." Nailed it... YoungDemCA Oct 2013 #5
Well said. obxhead Oct 2013 #6
Another thing that isn't really discussed is SheilaT Oct 2013 #7
Those are still valid points to keep in mind. randome Oct 2013 #11
Another way... Saviolo Oct 2013 #12
An article I read some time ago stated CrispyQ Oct 2013 #22
So very true. SheilaT Oct 2013 #23
I was caught up in consumerism. CrispyQ Oct 2013 #25
Thanks for your story. SheilaT Oct 2013 #26
I don't get cable Saviolo Oct 2013 #31
No cable or regular broadcast TV for me, either. SheilaT Oct 2013 #32
No equity Saviolo Oct 2013 #30
k&r for exposure. n/t Laelth Oct 2013 #8
You forgot one...some of us who DO invent something that would make a lot of money find shraby Oct 2013 #9
Indeed! Saviolo Oct 2013 #10
The typical right-wing response is, "I have to work myself half to death Lydia Leftcoast Oct 2013 #14
Hmmm, something you said: Saviolo Oct 2013 #21
This: CrispyQ Oct 2013 #24
Oh, and another thing: Parents could take time off for childcare without losing all Lydia Leftcoast Oct 2013 #29
Well said. It's been the case for a long time and wasted human creativity. freshwest Oct 2013 #16
K&R.... daleanime Oct 2013 #17
K&R. I 100% agree with you. nt laundry_queen Oct 2013 #19
This is a superb post. woo me with science Oct 2013 #27
Great post; thought provoking repkies. Thanks! K&R n/t ms liberty Oct 2013 #28
 

Autumn Colors

(2,379 posts)
2. May I ask a nosy question?
Sun Oct 13, 2013, 08:11 PM
Oct 2013

First of all, I agree with your post 100%, but I'm wondering if you're actually in the USA or somewhere else (Canada, UK?)

Just wondering because of all the British spelling rather than USA.

Doesn't really make a difference because your post has a lot of truth in it. I was just curious.

Saviolo

(3,282 posts)
4. Canada in fact
Sun Oct 13, 2013, 08:34 PM
Oct 2013

One major advantage we have in Canada vs. the USA is that it is unlikely that our livelihood will be ruined by a sudden and unexpected medical emergency.

We also had much stronger regulations on our banks during the financial crisis, which prevented Canada from falling quite so quickly or far as many of our neighbours and peers. However, our current right wing Prime Minister, Stephen Harper, is working his hardest to strip many of those regulations away, setting us up for a big fall if similar things happen again.

And thanks

 

Autumn Colors

(2,379 posts)
13. Harper
Sun Oct 13, 2013, 10:17 PM
Oct 2013

How on earth did this happen to Canada? When will you have the chance to vote him out, and do you think Canadians will do so?

Saviolo

(3,282 posts)
15. Next time around
Sun Oct 13, 2013, 10:26 PM
Oct 2013

Canadians just can't stand one party being in power for too long. The last time the Conservative Party (then known as the Progressive Conservatives) was in power for too long (Brian Mulroney), the party was absolutely decimated. They were dropped down from majority gov't down to two seats in the House of Commons. The joke at the time was that Jean Charest's wife was sleeping with half of the Tory caucus (since he was only one of two seats). Mulroney was a reaction to Pierre Trudeau (Liberal party). Stephen Harper was a reaction to Jean Cretien being in power for 10 years.

The problem in Canada we've been seeing lately is people in power for too long. By the end of a crazy long term of office, the leaders tend to be blase, bored, corruption becomes rote, and you lose perspective. The same thing happened with Dalton McGuinty, the premier of Ontario.

laundry_queen

(8,646 posts)
18. But NEVER happens in Alberta. LOL, go figure.
Mon Oct 14, 2013, 12:24 AM
Oct 2013

Really, though, good OP. It's also important to point out that parties languish in power too long when one end of the spectrum is split between 2 parties. Jean Chretien spent a lot of time in power thanks to the PC/Reform split and now Harper with the Liberal/NDP split. I think a lot of people have buyer's remorse for giving Harper a majority - they liked him on the short leash of a minority and were unprepared for his brazenness (despite what everyone said) with a majority.
I can't wait till he's gone...just so long as he's replaced by someone on the left.

Saviolo

(3,282 posts)
20. Oh, so agreed
Mon Oct 14, 2013, 12:55 AM
Oct 2013

Even the folks I know who voted Harper in are extremely disappointed in him. He ran on a platform of transparency, and then went on to lead the least transparent majority gov't ever. Incredible what he's been able to get away with and not called on by Canadians... or the Governor General... or anyone. His caucus is fracturing, he's in trouble. He was bearable as a minority leader, but with a majority he's 100% insufferable. Probably not worse, but at least on par with Mulroney.

 

YoungDemCA

(5,714 posts)
5. "Because community is only for rich people now." Nailed it...
Sun Oct 13, 2013, 08:38 PM
Oct 2013

And the effects of this are evident in the political parties, especially (but not exclusively) the Republicans....

 

SheilaT

(23,156 posts)
7. Another thing that isn't really discussed is
Sun Oct 13, 2013, 08:45 PM
Oct 2013

how very much cash it actually takes these days to live what most of us would consider a reasonable, but not rich, life.

We "need" so many more things than we used to. Cell phones, computers, very large HD tv, at least two cars in a family, gaming systems, and lots of other stuff I'm not even thinking of. Don't get me wrong. I have my share of stuff. It's inappropriate, to say the least, that someone today could live as if it's still 1963. But we're all caught in a trap of modern stuff, and it bothers me.

I realize that's completely apart from genuine income inequality, as well as our appalling lack of health care in this country. But still. . . . Then I think about the very real truth that if lower and middle income people have more money, they spend that money, which tends to increase the flow of money all around.

Sometimes it's all very discouraging.

 

randome

(34,845 posts)
11. Those are still valid points to keep in mind.
Sun Oct 13, 2013, 09:00 PM
Oct 2013

[hr][font color="blue"][center]There is nothing you can't do if you put your mind to it.
Nothing.
[/center][/font][hr]

Saviolo

(3,282 posts)
12. Another way...
Sun Oct 13, 2013, 09:27 PM
Oct 2013

...for us to anesthetize ourselves. Huge corporations tell us over and over again that we -need- these things. So we believe that we need them.

I do my best to eschew all of that crap. I don't have a smart phone. I don't have cable. I down own a car. I've trained myself to disobey all of those messages telling me that I -need- that stuff. It's hard. It's basically been driven into us for decades!

CrispyQ

(36,469 posts)
22. An article I read some time ago stated
Mon Oct 14, 2013, 05:09 PM
Oct 2013

that Americans are trinket rich, but equity poor. We have gadgets, nice furniture & nice cars, but no equity in our houses or savings accounts. It must be true because recently there was that study that found a huge number of people could not come up with $2000 without the help of a family member or friend.

on edit: from May 2011

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/business/2011/05/50-americans-couldnt-come-up-2000/38058/

Nearly half of Americans are living in a state of "financial fragility," a new paper by the National Bureau of Economic Research reveals. To determine this statistic, researchers from the George Washington School of Business, Princeton University, and Harvard Business School asked survey participants whether they would be able to come up with $2,000 for an "unexpected expense in the next month." 22.2 percent predicted they would be "probably unable" and 27.9 percent said they'd certainly be unable to foot the unplanned bill. The hypothetical cost "reflects the order of magnitude of the cost of an unanticipated major car repair, a large co-payment on a medical expense, legal expenses, or a home repair." But, it was the participants' method of coping that really determined their fragility:

Taken together with those who would pawn their possessions, sell their home, or take out a payday loan, 25.7% of respondents who were asked about coping methods (equal to 18.6% of all respondents) would come up with the funds for an emergency by resorting to what might be seen as extreme measures,” the authors write. “Along with the 27.9% of respondents who report that they could certainly not cope with an emergency, this suggests that approximately 46.5% of all respondents are living very close to the financial edge.


 

SheilaT

(23,156 posts)
23. So very true.
Mon Oct 14, 2013, 05:25 PM
Oct 2013

Even though I have visited some other countries, I've never lived anywhere but in the U.S., and other than going briefly across the border to Canada or Mexico, I haven't traveled abroad since 2001. That means I don't know what day-to-day reality is like in other countries, and I'm only here thinking about other first world countries.

What I do know about this one is how we are immersed in messages telling us to buy, to consume; never are there messages about saving. While there is certainly genuine poverty and hardship in this country, far too many people who have earned a decent income have never saved a penny. If there's a pay raise, it's spent. A bonus, it's spent.

During my marriage, my husband's parents very generously gifted us with money. We always saw that as money that needed to be saved and invested. Most people would simply adjust their standard of living up. We didn't, and now I have a financial cushion that matters a lot.

It helps a great deal that I no longer have a TV. I do watch the shows I want to see over the internet, or wait until the DVD comes out, so I'm not at all deprived culturally. But what I miss out on are the commercials. I see very, very few, and I never get to see political ads, which is really great. By being cut off from the constant commands to buy, it's not hard to live a reasonably frugal lifestyle without feeling deprived.

All too often those who are living paycheck to paycheck have always had a substantial car payment, have always lived in a house a little bigger than really necessary. Their kids have always had the latest in whatever kid fashions are current. And so on.

Recently I was actually browsing through the electronics section of Target, and I was honestly astonished at what was out there. Wow! So many ways to spend your money. So few incentives not to.

CrispyQ

(36,469 posts)
25. I was caught up in consumerism.
Mon Oct 14, 2013, 06:26 PM
Oct 2013

It's very easy in our culture. You are bombarded with ads, everywhere you go, even your mailbox. Then I read the book, "Affluenza: The All Consuming Epidemic."

http://www.amazon.com/Affluenza-The-All-Consuming-Epidemic-Currents/dp/1576753573

It's worth it for the collection of Horsey cartoons, alone! It changed my perspective. I de-cluttered my entire house, including my basement. Then I went after a storage shed we were renting. We were renting space for stuff we never used!! I emptied it in a couple of months & hardly any of it ended up back in my house. I was the most popular person at the two local thrift shops that summer. And when I find myself falling back into it, I read it again.

When I was at the storage place that summer, one day a man came in & his unit was about 5 from mine, so we struck up a conversation. I told him my goal was to have it emptied by end of summer. He said, "If you do that, call me. I have three units & am looking to get another one. I don't even know how to start to get rid of this stuff." He's basically a hoarder who has enough money to stash it away.

And hoarders. Oh my. Don't get me started. I live across the street from a hoarder family. Last month, when we got a record 9 inches of rain, they had two Bagsters full of stuff, sitting in their front yard. It took two calls to the city & an angry email with a photo of the mess, before they were finally made to have it removed.

We have a sick society. The religious right blames feminists, gays & minorities for our problems, but really, it's love of money/stuff that is the problem with this country, & when I look around, the Christians have Affluenza just as bad as any other group. It's a cultural sickness.

Saviolo

(3,282 posts)
31. I don't get cable
Wed Oct 16, 2013, 10:28 AM
Oct 2013

I don't get cable, so I almost never see TV commercials. I see billboards and hear radio ads, but almost never see TV commercials. I noticed this most starkly when I went to see a movie not too long ago. There is a very dense and intense burst of advertising before the movie starts, always. It's not just trailers and coming attractions. Just before that, there is a burst of food, car, and lifestyle advertisements. It's concentrated, fast, loud, and densely packed with messages to buy. I have an actual physical reaction to it. After taking in so little advertising of that kind, just to have such an intense burst of it makes me shake, makes my stomach churn. It's like a fight or flight response to the assault on my mental environment.

It's like I can finally see the fnords (for anyone who's ever read the Illuminatus! trilogy). Like the blipverts in Max Headroom causing people to explode.

 

SheilaT

(23,156 posts)
32. No cable or regular broadcast TV for me, either.
Wed Oct 16, 2013, 01:06 PM
Oct 2013

I watch plenty of stuff over the internets, and that way I see very few commercials.

When I go to the movies, I know that the listed start time is actually the time that the previews start, and I try very hard to time my walking into the theater so I get there during those previews. When I do arrive earlier and see the ads, I find them weird and annoying.

Saviolo

(3,282 posts)
30. No equity
Wed Oct 16, 2013, 10:18 AM
Oct 2013

One of the major reasons that this is true is that more people are renting now than owning, so they are building no equity. How can you afford to put a down payment on a mortgage and start building equity if you can't even really afford first and last at a new place to rent? Landlords will raise the rent to get every last dollar out of the tenants that the market could possibly bear. I'm fortunate in that respect, as I've had the same landlord in the same place for about 9 years, and he has never once raised the rent on us (he likes us 'cause we're not University students who'll wreck the place).

The rents are too damn high!

shraby

(21,946 posts)
9. You forgot one...some of us who DO invent something that would make a lot of money find
Sun Oct 13, 2013, 08:56 PM
Oct 2013

the idea is stolen by a corporation and marketed with no monetary gain for the real inventor.
I.E. the weed-eater for a case in point.

Saviolo

(3,282 posts)
10. Indeed!
Sun Oct 13, 2013, 08:59 PM
Oct 2013

100% correct. Or obscure intellectual property laws are invoked that only the wealthy corporations can afford to litigate.

Lydia Leftcoast

(48,217 posts)
14. The typical right-wing response is, "I have to work myself half to death
Sun Oct 13, 2013, 10:18 PM
Oct 2013

so some asshole can sit around all day, taking drugs and making babies?"

But think it through. With a guaranteed income, THEY could cut back on the hours that they worked at that job they hated. If your boss wanted you full time, he'd have to sweeten the deal, especially with benefits separated from employment. Jobs would compete for employees instead of the other way around. People would start their own businesses, knowing that if the idea failed, they wouldn't be on the streets.

The whole system of welfare payments would be unnecessary, since each adult would receive a set amount of money, and it would have to be irrespective of income, or else the rich would squawk. Damn, they'd want their $28,000, if they already had their $28 million, because otherwise they'd complain about it. If they received their $28,000, they'd be fine with The Homeless Guy Downtown receiving his, too.

Such a system would even encourage marriage--something the Republicans are always going on about--because while a single parent would get only $28,000, a "double" set of parents would get $56,000, a notable increase in their standard of living.

Furthermore, aside from the sociopaths among us, the ones who will commit crimes no matter what their economic status, your average criminal is an opportunist. Give him a non-criminal way to meet his needs, and he'll stay out of trouble. It's no coincidence that property crimes rise and fall in inverse proportion to the economy. (Here in Japan, where I am spending some time now, crime was amazingly low during the prosperous 1970s and 1980s and began rising when the bubble economy collapsed.)

The powers that be hate the idea of a guaranteed income, but that's because it would take power away from them. How psycho could your boss get if you knew that you could survive (perhaps at a reduced level) without working for him?

It might generate a whole set of unforeseen problems, but we KNOW that our current system generates a huge raft of problems.

Saviolo

(3,282 posts)
21. Hmmm, something you said:
Mon Oct 14, 2013, 09:22 AM
Oct 2013
Furthermore, aside from the sociopaths among us, the ones who will commit crimes no matter what their economic status, your average criminal is an opportunist. Give him a non-criminal way to meet his needs, and he'll stay out of trouble.


It might actually make it easier to spot those people. Another reason we'll never see a system like that in North American with its for-profit prison system. Makes much more sense to just go ahead and imprison the poor.

A few lines from the Rage Against the Machine track "Ashes in the Fall:"
Ain't it funny how the factory doors close
'Round the time that the school doors close
'Round the time that a hundred thousand jail cells
Open up to greet you like a reaper!


Full song here:

CrispyQ

(36,469 posts)
24. This:
Mon Oct 14, 2013, 05:27 PM
Oct 2013
The powers that be hate the idea of a guaranteed income, but that's because it would take power away from them. How psycho could your boss get if you knew that you could survive (perhaps at a reduced level) without working for him?


And this made me & also at the same time:

it would have to be irrespective of income, or else the rich would squawk. Damn, they'd want their $28,000, if they already had their $28 million, because otherwise they'd complain about it.


The OP said that community is now only for the rich. So is leisure time. When you don't have a job & are fretting about how to make the rent & pay for groceries for the kids, that is not leisure time.

I would think most American's would be happy to see what kind of problems this system would generate,but I'm sure there are many who would object, even it would be to their benefit. Just like now, & how they vote repub.

Lydia Leftcoast

(48,217 posts)
29. Oh, and another thing: Parents could take time off for childcare without losing all
Tue Oct 15, 2013, 12:06 AM
Oct 2013

the income from their job.

Say that a family has one child, and they want to have it at home full time. One parent (or both, if they took turns) can take parental leave till the child is in school.

I think this could be sold to right-wingers as a "family values" measure: encouraging marriage and allowing parents to stay home with their children.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Something finally occurre...